RBScript driven Torque would be cool, but embedding the RB compiler
into Torque isn't something a third party can do (not without RS's
blessing and source code at least). One of Garage Game's big selling
points is that you get the full source code, so it's unlikely that
this will happen even if RS was on board...
Frank.
<http://developer.chaoticbox.com/>
<http://macgameblog.com/>
On 1-Jan-07, at 10:45 AM, William Squires wrote:
Actually, it's that last part that interests me - using RBScript
instead (I like the fact that RB requires variables to be declared
before use, and is more strongly typed - the existing TorqueScript
kinda reminds me of a cross between C# and the old GW-BASIC where
you could just make up variables on the fly just by using them and
giving them a type specifier code like % for integers, & for longs,
$ for strings and so on.)
On Jan 1, 2007, at 12:02 AM, Seth Willits wrote:
On Dec 31, 2006, at 7:23 PM, Giovanni wrote:
When you say there is no benefits, how would rb not benefit from
a game engine?
Because you wouldn't want to interface with Torque via RB. There's
no benefit. Adding REALbasic into the equation would muck Torque
up. You'd be far better off using Torque itself, as it is was
designed.
To use Torque, you either a) write C++ code to tweak and extend
the engine, b) use the built-in editors to create custom GUIs or
modify the world & terrain, or c) you write TorqueScript code
which is completely designed to hook into the C++ code. REALbasic
won't help with any of these.
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
